Hi Nick and Dan:
Great info! Nick, would you kindly outline your steps for the creation of a
Lightjet digital neg. I'll be using a Durst Lambda and I'm just concerned
with choosing the right media.
Thanks,
Andy Darlow
At 07:00 AM 12/8/99 -0800, you wrote:
>Dan,
>
>Regarding costs of Light Jet negs, my sense is that the difference is less
>than 1.5X the imagesetter negs. My inclination is toward continuous tone as
>opposed to a halftone. I know that at some point one would be hard put to
>discern the difference between a very fine line halftone and continuous
>tone, however at that point the costs would be very similar. I have seen a
>side by side comparison of a light jet image and the same image from a the
>same digital file on a lightjet print (negs having the same quality) - there
>is no comparison.
>
>Moreover, you can take a 300DPI image of say 8X10 size and the Light Jet can
>successfully interpolate it into a 16X20 or larger image and the continuous
>tone will still be there. In fact, you don't have to send anything greater
>than 400DPI for any size image. And the good thing is what you see is what
>you get - no special instructions to the service bureau are required. If
>your monitor and printer are in concert and you like what you see from your
>printer, then you will love what you see from a Light Jet. Simply save the
>file as an uncompressed TIF file and send it off on a ZIP disk or CD.
>
>So, if I can't satisfy myself with Epson negs, I will probably pop the $20
>each for an 8X10 Light Jet. By the way, I have found that the cost
>differences for Light Jet negs from one service bureau to the next, are
>huge.
>
>I am about to make a final test of Epson Back Light film - after thinking
>about my last post regarding 'nearly continuous tone', I think that I have
>stumbled on the answer. In any case, there is no way that the Epson neg
>will compare to the Light Jet, so the question is "can I accept the
>difference".
>
>
>Nick
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: FDanB@aol.com <FDanB@aol.com>
>To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
><alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca>
>Date: Tuesday, December 07, 1999 7:01 PM
>Subject: Re: Digital success
>
>
>>Hey Nick,
>>
>>Remember, imagesetter negatives are MUCH less expensive than Lightjet.
>>
>>Dan
>>
>>You said in your message...
>>
>>>If I miss my guess, I will ultimately be creating my iimages via Light Jet
>>>negs.
>>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 11 2000 - 12:10:48